MIT just pulled the plug on its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion office, signaling a seismic shift in academia’s woke landscape. President Sally Kornbluth’s decision, driven by a faculty assessment, lands as the Trump administration turns up the heat on such programs nationwide.
The New York Post reported that following a review by senior faculty, MIT shuttered its DEI office, while the Trump administration expanded a civil rights probe into the university for alleged racial discrimination and antisemitic harassment.
This move dovetails with President Trump’s executive orders earlier this year, which yanked federal support for DEI initiatives. The timing couldn’t be sharper.
In December 2023, Kornbluth faced a congressional grilling alongside Harvard’s Claudine Gay and Penn’s Liz Magill over antisemitic harassment post-Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel.
Gay and Magill didn’t survive the fallout, stepping down soon after. MIT’s DEI closure suggests Kornbluth is reading the room better than her peers.
Trump’s orders didn’t just target DEI; they slashed federal funding, costing MIT up to $35 million in NIH and Department of Energy grants. This financial hit forced MIT to trim 100 graduate student spots for 2025-26, an 8% cut from this year. The ivory tower’s feeling the pinch.
“Students must be assessed according to merit and accomplishment, not prejudged by the color of their skin,” said Linda McMahon, echoing the administration’s push for colorblind meritocracy.
Meanwhile, MIT’s joined legal battles against Trump’s grant cuts, but closing the DEI office shows they’re picking their fights. Smart move, or too little, too late?
Harvard, by contrast, doubled down on DEI and paid dearly, losing over $3 billion in federal funding. The Trump administration’s legal showdown with Harvard underscores a broader message: resist, and you’ll bleed. MIT’s pivot suggests they’d rather adapt than hemorrhage.
“MIT is in the talent business,” Kornbluth declared, insisting the university must attract diverse talent while ensuring everyone feels “welcome and supported.” Nice sentiment, but when DEI offices become lightning rods for division, scrapping them might actually foster unity. Or so the logic goes.
The Title VI probe into MIT, deepened in March, zeroed in on antisemitic harassment and sex discrimination.
Kornbluth’s closure of the DEI office could be a preemptive strike to clean house before federal investigators do it for her. Nobody wants to be Harvard right now.
“While students ‘have been pained by chants and recent demonstrations,’ MIT has a responsibility to ‘ensure that we protect speech and viewpoint diversity for everyone,’” Kornbluth said. She’s threading a needle—defending free speech while dodging the chaos that sank her peers. Bold, but will it work?
“Meeting those goals is challenging and the results can be terribly uncomfortable,” Kornbluth added, acknowledging the tightrope of campus discourse.
Yet, discomfort is the crucible where ideas are tested, not silenced. DEI’s focus on group identity often stifles that process.
“Those who want us to shut down protest language are in effect, arguing for a speech code,” Kornbluth warned, rejecting calls to censor campus protests. She’s right—speech codes are a slippery slope, but so is letting divisive ideologies fester unchecked. MIT’s DEI closure might just cut that Gordian knot.
Harvard’s Claudine Gay, when pressed on antisemitism, famously said, “It depends on the context.” That vagueness cost her dearly, proving clarity matters more than platitudes. MIT’s decisive action suggests they’re not banking on “context” to save them.
MIT’s DEI office is gone, but Kornbluth’s still preaching inclusion, claiming it’s essential for talent to thrive. Without the bureaucratic baggage, though, maybe MIT can focus on merit over mandates.